STATE OF HARYANA Vs. SOHAN LAL KALRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY this judgment, I dispose of two C.Rs. No. 2239 and 2240, of 1983, titled State of Haryana and anr. v. Sohan Lal Kalra, as in the opinion of this court, both the revisions can be disposed of by one judgment because the point of law for determination in both the revisions is the same.

(2.) THE brief facts of the case are that the respondent Sohan Lal Kalra used to work as a Contractor with the P.W.D. (B and R) Department and he filed an application under section 20 of the Indian Arbitration Act, 1940 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') in the court of Shri B.P. Jindal, the then Sub Judge Ist Class, Karnal. Notice of the application was given to the State. Since, there was an arbitration agreement between the parties, the State did not object to the application under section 20 of the Act and as per the agreement, vide order dated 5.12.1979, the matter was referred to the Arbitration of Shri B.K. Wadhwa, Superintending Engineer, PWD (B and R), Rohtak. The Arbitrator gave the award on 14.1.1981 vide which the Contractor was directed to pay to the State a sum of Rs. 59,275/- in one case and Rs. 623.39 in the other, to the State. An application was moved by the State under section 14 and 17 of the Act for making the award as rule of the court. Notice of the application was served upon the Contractor, who filed objections under section 30 and 33 of the Act and it was pleaded by him that it was the duty of the Arbitrator to appreciate the relevant documents on the basis of which he made his award, such as, measurement book, etc. It was also pleaded by the Contractor that the Contractor did not follow the principles of natural justice and he did not afford opportunity to the parties to adduce evidence and in these circumstances, the award should be set aside and should not be made the rule of the court.

(3.) THE parties led evidence in support of their case and finally the trial court vide order dated 9.12.1982 decided issue No. 1 against the Contractor. However, issue No. 2 was decided in favour of the Contractor but on the strength of the findings given on issue No. 1, the objections under section 30 and 33 of the Act, filed by the Contractor, were dismissed and the application under section 14/17 of the Act was allowed and both the awards made by the Arbitrator were ordered to be made rule of the court and it was further ordered by the trial court that the State of Haryana shall realise interest also at the rate of 12% on the awarded amount.